english heritage at gorse industrial estate

FORMER ATOMIC WEAPONS STORE NO. 94MAINTENANCE UNIT RAF BARNHAM, GORSE INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, ELVEDEN, SUFFOLKConservation and Management PlanApril 2007ACTAPurcell Miller TrittonCONTENTS PAGEVOLUME 1: TEXT1. INTRODUCTION 12. UNDERSTANDING THE SITE 33. SIGNIFICANCES 244. ISSUES 295. POLICIES 356. MANAGEMENT STRATEGY 387. MAINTENANCE PLAN 458. BIBLIOGRAPHY 46VOLUME 2: FIGURES, PHOTOGRAPHS AND GAZETTEERFIGURES1. Location and Topography.2a. Compartments and Buildings South.2b. Compartments and Buildings North.3a. Vegetation South3b Vegetation North4. Air Photograph of the Site and Wartime Maintenance Unit, 19455. Phases of Development6. Air Photograph of the Site, 19557. Air Photograph of the Site, 19598. Looking Northeast towards Store 10.61 from the Roof of Building 12.58, Mid-1960s9. Looking Southwest from the Roof of Building 12.58, Mid-1960sAPPENDICES1. Site of Special Scientific Interest Schedule.2. Plans Showing Fence Locations and Use of the Buildings3. Scheduled Monument Description.4. Suffolk County Council Sites and Monuments Records..PHOTOGRAPHS1. Looking towards the site from the Ickneild Way2. The sterile area and the chainlink fence3. The concrete panel fence4. The car-breaker’s yard within the sterile area5. Type A fissile core hutch6. Type B fissile core hutch7. Gantry 10.1458. The approach road9. The pantechnicon park10. Compartment 5GAZETTEERCompartment 1: Approach Road1.65 Picket post1.68 Motor transport building1.81 Standby set house/generator building1.84 Standby set house/generator building1.100 Chainlink fences1.101 Site of petrol store1.102 Lamp standards1.103 Pantechnicon park and car parkCompartment 2: Outer Sector East2.67 Duty officer’s quarters2.70 Substation/transformer/destructor (Crisp)2.71 Standby set house2.75 Small arms and pyrotechnics store2.104 Building ?2.105 Outer chainlink fence2.10.6 Former gardenCompartment 3: Outer Sector West3.63 Guard room and control centre3.66 Fire Station3.76 Barrack accommodation3.78 Telephone exchange3.79 Meat preparation store3.80 Site of dog kennels3.82 Mess block3.107 Building?3.108 Building?3.109 Outer fence3.110 Recent building?3.111 Fuel tank3.112 Site of outer gateCompartment 4: Fences and Sterile Area4.113 Chainlink fence4.114a-e Observation towers4.115 Gate4.116 Inner fence4.117 Sterile area grassland4.118 Sterile area plantation4.119 Sterile area southeast4.120 Car-breaker’s yard4.121 Modern building4.122 Fence path4.123 Lamp postsCompartment 5: West Hutches5.1-5.13 Plutonium hutches5.49-5.51 Cobalt hutches5.124 Grassland and woodland6.125 Inner gatehouse5.126 Paths to hutches5.127 Railings to hutches5.128 Lamp postsCompartment 6: West Stores6.59 Bomb stores6.124 Blast mounds6.130 Blast mound retaining walls6.139 Woodland and grasslandCompartment 7: North Hutches7.17-72 Plutonium hutches7.52-53 Cobalt hutches7.69 Inspection building7.72 Static water tank7.132 Mature broadleaf trees7.133 Woodland, scrub and grassland7.134 Hand rails7.135 Paths7.136 Lamp postsCompartment 8: North Stores8.60 Bomb store8.137 Gantry8.138 Blast mounds8.139 Blast mound retaining wallsCompartment 9: Northeast Hutches9.28-32 Plutonium hutches9.55-57 Cobalt hutches9.140 Parts9.141 Lamp posts9.142 Mature broadleaf trees9.146 Woodland, scrub and grasslandCompartment 10: West Stores10.61 Bomb store10.144 Blast mounds10.145 Gantry10.146 Blast mound retaining wallsCompartment 11: Southeast Hutches11.33-48 Plutonium hutches11.74 Static water tank11.147 Paths11.148 Hand railsLamp posts11.149 Toilet block11.150 Mature broadleaf trees11.151 Woodland, scrub and grasslandCompartment 12: Central Area South12.51 Maintenance building12.62 Maintenance building12.85 Inspection and repair workshop12.152 Blast walls12.153 MoundsCompartment 13: Central Area North13.154 Central area13.155 Central mounds13.156 Central area retaining walls1. INTRODUCTION1.1 This Conservation Management Plan for the former RAF Barnham Atomic Weapons Store within No. 94 Maintenance Unit, now the Gorse Industrial Estate, has been commissioned by Mr Keith Eldred with assistance from English Heritage. It covers the area shown on Figs. 1 and 2a,b. Its purpose is to give:— a long-term management strategy;— proposals for repair and conservation;— a 10-year maintenance plan.1.2 The format is a conventional one for a conservation and management plan.— Section 2 sets out an understanding of the site with reference to the gazetteer in Volume 2. This describes the present state, original function and conservation issues for buildings, earthworks and vegetation. The locations of the buildings are shown on Figs 2a and 2b and the site is divided into 14 compartments. Gazetteer entries are shown in bold in the text preceded by the compartment number.— Section 3 describes the significance of the site and of individual buildings using the criteria of Semple-Kerr.— Section 4 sets out issues and section 5 policies.— A management strategy is given in section 6. Where there are realistic options for individual features or groups of features the relative heritage impacts of the options are assessed.— Section 7 is the 10-year maintenance plan and section 8 the bibliography.1.3 The site is designated a Scheduled Monument (no. 20608 Appendix 1)1.4 We are grateful to Mr Eldred for his advice and comments and to the tenants of the industrial estate for access. The RAF Museum, Hendon provided helpful guidance on RAF records. The sections on the history of the site and how it functioned draw heavily on Wayne Cocroft’s report for the Monuments Protection Programme.2. UNDERSTANDING THE SITE2.1 Location and Landscape Setting2.1.1 The Gorse Industrial Estate lies on Thetford Heath off Elveden Road 3.5 km (2 miles) south of Thetford (Fig. 1). It covers approximately 9 ha (23 acres). The ground rises from 23m AOD at the roadside to 40m AOD at the north end of the site. It is surrounded by heathland comprising the Thetford Heath Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI, Appendix 1) and the land to the west is a National Nature Reserve. When the Atomic Weapons Store was constructed in the early 1950s much of the surrounding landscape was open heathland. Following the outbreak of myxomatosis in 1956 and the decline in stock grazing, Scots Pine (Pinus sylvestris) and broadleaved trees spread across the heath, but recently there has been substantial clearance so that the site’s surroundings are now quite similar to the 1950s landscape. As a result, from some aspects the site appears as a large copse (Photo 1) in a fairly open landscape2.2.2 Exclamation/Aughton Spinney extends to the north and south of the site (Fig. 1) and was an established copse before the military use of the site was developed. To the east the land is used for training by the Ministry of Defence (MOD) and has a higher density of trees than the land to the west. It rises to RAF Barham Camp which was built at the north end of the site of the Second World War and 1950s Maintenance Unit, which extended up to the boundary of the present site. A third military site, now largely restored to the heathland but with some surviving buildings , lay at Little Heath south of Elveden Road and was used by the United States military to store Mustard Gas.2.1.2 South of Elveden Road the land falls slightly before rising to West Calthorpe Heath so that the site is potentially visible from up to 4km. The locality lies within Natural England’s Breckland Landscape Character Area and this surrounding land is a typical of the character area.2.2 Geology and SoilsTo follow2.3 Designations and Planning Policy2.3.1 The site is a Scheduled Monument (No 11393, Appendix 1) and is surrounded by a Site of Special Scientific Interest (Appendix 2). The land to the west (Fig. 1) is Open Access land designated under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act, 2000.2.3.2 Gorse Industrial Estate is classed as a General Employment Area in the Adopted Replacement St Edmunsbury Borough Local Plan 2016 – Draft. Policy E1 applies.Policy E1: Existing Employment Land and PremisesThe re-development of existing employment land and premises for existing employment and alternative employment uses will be supported, subject to satisfying other policies in the Plan.The loss of industrial, warehousing, office and business land or premises for any purpose other than those uses will not be permitted unless:a) It is evident that the existing use has created overriding environmental problems; orb) It can be demonstrated that the proposal would not diminish unacceptably the existing local supply of land or units available.Criterion (a) does not apply to residential development or mixed use development incorporating an element of housing.Proposals involving car showrooms with workshops, as well as bulky building materials and trade warehouses will be considered favourably on existing employment land or premises.2.3.3Three types of use are acceptable to the planning authority.Class B1 BusinessUse for all or any of the following purposes:-a) as an office other than a use within Class A2 (financial and professional services);b) for research and development of products or processes, orc) for any industrial process being a use which can be carried out in any residential area without detriment to the amenity of that area by reason of noise, vibration, smell, fumes, smoke, soot, ash, dust or grit.Class B2 General IndustrialUse for the carrying out of an industrial process other than one falling within Class B1 above.Class B8 Storage or DistributionUse for storage or as a distribution centre.2.3.4 The current uses of the buildings are listed in the gazetteer and summarised in section 2.8.2.4 Compartments andPrincipal Features2.4.1 The site can be divided into the following compartments shown on Figs. 2a and 2b:1. Approach Road.2. Outer Sector East.3. Outer Sector West.4. Fences and Sterile Area.5. West Store.7. North Hutches.8. North Store.9. Northeast Hutches.10. East Stores.11. Southeast Hutches.12. Central Area South.13. Central Areas North.14. Septic Tank E.The last is outside the site and on MOD property but needs to be considered within the plan since there are a number of drainage issues to be addressed.2.4.2 The main part of the site (compartments 2-13) comprises a pentagon 400 m across at its widest which was originally enclosed by a chainlink fence 2.4m (8 ft) high (4.113, Photo. 2). Observation towers (4.114 a-e) are present on each corner and at the entrance. A hedge of native deciduous trees and shrubs which is now up to 4m (13ft) high has been planted against most of the fence. Twenty-five meters (86ft) inside the chainlink fence there is a concrete panel fence (4.116, Photo 3). The sterile area between the two fences (4.117-20) may be at the original level before the Atomic Weapons Store was constructed.2.4.3 The entrance to the pentagon is at the centre of the southwest side. From here, clockwise to about the mid-point of the north side the vegetation of the sterile area is grassland over which there is Scots Pine, Norway Spruce (Picea abies) and Silver Birch (Betula pendula) at variable densities. The east end of the north side and most of the east side is dominated by a closely-spaced plantation of Scots Pine. Where this stops, there are birch, pine and spruce a greater density in the rest of the sterile area. Adjacent to the east side of the entrance there is a car breaker’s yard (4.120, Photo 4).2.4.4 At the centre of the pentagon there is a loop road around a square area surrounded by mounds (13.153) up to 4.4m (14ft 6ins) high and 65 ft (20m) wide. Most of this area is now woodland and scrub. At the four corners there are triangular retaining walls (13.156).. At the southwest end is a storage building (12.58) separated by a mound from storage building 12.62. Flanking the entrance to the latter, there are two blast walls (12.152).2.4. 5 Three non-nuclear stores and their associated blast mounds lie set out off the central loop. The west store (6.59) was gutted by a fire in the 1980s and was subsequently demolished leaving a concrete floor slab. The others two stores (8.60 and10.61) still stand.2.4.6 Between the non-nuclear stores there are four groups of hutches (Photo 5) which were used for the storage of the fissile nuclear cores. These are set out in a regular pattern and served by concrete paths.2.4.7 South of the main chainlink fence, compartments 2 and 3 comprise two narrow triangular-shaped areas either side of the entrance road. To the east are the former duty officer’s quarters (2.67) and associated buildings with an open area behind. To the west are the former mess (3.77), guard room and control centre (3.63) and associated buildings with an enclosure beyond containing the site of the dog-kennels (3.80).2.4.8 The site is approached by a straight road off Elveden Road with the former motor transport building (1.68) and set houses (1.81,84)on the east side now used for car maintenance/repair. Shortly after this there is a right-angle bend beyond which there is a car park on the south side of the road.2.4.9 The condition and present use of the site is set out in section 2.8 following a description of the history and operation of the Atomic Weapons store.2.5 The Site before the 1950s2.5.1 Thetford Heath is a site of considerable prehistoric and geomorphologic interest and it is possible that features associated with this lie beneath present undisturbed levels or were removed or buried during construction of the site. A Bronze Age urn has been found on the higher ground just north of Barnham Camp (Fig 1, BNH017) and a possible barrow to the north of the industrial estate (BNH 051). Earthworks to the northwest (BNH 055 and 053) are probably post-medieval. However the main area of known prehistoric and Roman activity lay in the Little Ouse Valley (BNH10,12,14). The SMR entries for all sites including the Atomic Weapons Store are given in Appendix 4.2.5.2 The area was in military use by the outbreak of the Second World War and was centrally located for the wartime Bomber Command airbases, as it subsequently was for the V-bombers. By at least 1942 the Air Ministry controlled the east part of Thetford Heath, bounded by Elveden Road to the south, Bury Road to the east and the Boundary Belt (Fig 1) to the north. The west boundary was Exclamation Spinney and Aughton Spinney. The bottom southeast corner of the area was cut by the (now dismantled) Bury St Edmunds to Thetford railway line.2.5.3 During the war the area north of Elveden Road appears to have had two functions: the storage of Mustard Gas at the west end of the site and the storage of explosives towards the east. The Mustard Gas area was Forward Filling Depot No.1 Barnham Heath ( don’t understand this ref Toler shows it further east more or less on the site of the Atomic Weapons Store) It was enclosed by a fence with pillboxes at its corners. The area to the east was No 94 Maintenance Unit. The Air Ministry files are sometimes confusing, because although the Atomic Weapons Store was created as a separate No. 95 Maintenance Unit in 1956 it was re-named No 94 to commemorate the wartime use. The depot was served by a branch of the Bury St Edmunds to Thetford railway By 1945 (Fig 4) there were three high explosive magazines with surrounding blast mounds and the adjacent land was used for munitions storage. The area was divided by unmade tracks, and the munitions were stored under temporary linear shelters. Some of the tracks are still traceable today although some were altered in the 1950s.2.6 The Development of the Atomic Weapons Store2.6.1 At the end of the war there was still a major requirement for explosives storage since scaling down of production did not keep pace with military events, so storage at Barnham continued. In the early 1950s the Air Ministry reviewed its requirements for conventional heavy explosive bombs and concluded that they were still required‘The only justification for complete elimination of HE Bombs so far as medium bomber force is concerned would be certain knowledge that we could obtain all atomic bombs we need to achieve our first objective i.e. reducing the atomic air threat to these islands during the first few days of future war in which atomic and thermo-nuclear weapons would be used by both sides.By 1958 when our V force should be completed it is unlikely that we would have enough atomic weapons from our own resources to achieve, but I do not know whether supplies would be forthcoming from other sources (ie the United States) to augment our stocks.In fact, production of atomic bombs appears to have been below even these expectations and it is likely that no more than 20 cores for Blue Danube, the bomb for which the Atomic Weapons Store was built, were ever produced. This was in part due to the restricted availability of plutonium and highly enriched uranium and in part because until the V bombers were operational there was no means of delivering the bomb and therefore little urgency to production. By that time, Blue Danube had been superseded by Red Beard. A new conventional store was considered at Little Heath, but this was not taken up, although the site was decommissioned from use for the storage of Mustard Gas. The main part of the Barnham site was modified for use for heavy explosives and the Mustard Gas storage near Exclamation Copse removed.2.6.2 Blue Danube (otherwise known as Special Weapon Mark 1) was issued to the RAF in November 1953. It was originally thought that the RAF would hold the bombs in kit form at small depots from which they would be to be assembled in time of war. This proved to be impractical and the next phase was to develop ‘clutches’ at the V bomber airfields: Coningsby, Cottesmore, Finningley, Gaydon, Honington, Marham, Scampton, Waddington, Wittering and Wyton. Each clutch of bombs supported an operational squadron. The purpose of the Atomic Weapons Store at Barnham and the almost identical site at Faldingworth in Lincolnshire was to provide deep maintenance and refurbishment and to hold spare warheads for a second strike. Some of the original airfield storage facilities for Blue Danube, such as those at Wittering, survive.2.6.3 The Air Ministry plan for the Store is dated May 1953 and it was fully operational by July 1954. But Drawing 3563/52 is dated April 1952 and planning is likely to have begun well before this. The site is said to have been purchased by the Air Ministry on 28 September 1954, which suggests part of the heath had been derequisitioned since the war, but this needs clarifying. In this first phase (Fig 5) the fences, earthworks, the hutches for storing the fissile cores, the inspection buildings and presumably the gantries were constructed. Fig 5 indicates that building works were substantially complete by August 1955. Air Ministry Drawing 3001c/53 gas was amended to show the addition of the small arms building (2.75) barracks (3.76) mess block (3.77) telephone exchange (3.78) meat preparation store (3.79) and dog compound (3.80) with drawings dated late 1955 and early 1956, but as Fig 5 shows they had already been built by August 1955. Nevertheless, they were presumably a second phase to strengthen security. The Store (known as the Special Storage Unit), remained the main holding unit for the Mark 1 atomic bomb until November 1956 when the operation of Bomber Command was stacked to capacity (what does this mean?). On the first of September 1956 an independent station commanding unit 95 Maintenance Unit was formed, but in the following year it was re-named 94 Maintenance Unit. Administratively Barnham was commanded by No.40 Group with its headquarters at Honington. In the late 1950s it was intended that this group would supply the airfields at Honington, Marham and Wyton. And Wittering?2.6.4 Fig 5 shows that the double fence arrangement was in place by mid-1955. Beyond this was another fence, which from the shadow cast appears to have been less substantial than the other two (see also Fig 7). South of the pentagon it extended along the west boundary of the Air Ministry land to Elveden Road and to the east it included a substantial triangle of land now outside the site. In addition, the setting up of Danert wire security fencing 75 yards beyond the outer fence is mentioned several times in the Operations Record Books and the outer fence was presumably the third fence rather than the present chainlink one. But the Air Ministry appears to have had difficulty in acquiring the land to the west of the site and it is not clear if this was ever completed. There were, however, at least two coils of barbed wire on the ground outside the chainlink fence, since fragments of this still survive, and there are also references to trip wires in the Operations Record Books2.6.5 There were other security measures. A public address system was being installed in September 1955 and security lighting was erected around the whole of the boundary at the end of 1956 although in both cases it is not clear if these replaced systems that were already there. By January 1959 the southwest boundary had been moved inwards Fig 7) to create a sterile area free of buildings and a few months later ‘new’ observation towers were erected. There appear to have replaced much slighter structures that can just be seen on Fig 6 and more clearly on NMR 1540/RAF/1778 frame 0128 reproduced in Cocroft and Thomas.2.6.5 By the later 1950s the conventional weapons store to the east had become obsolete and levelling for construction of the camp that is present today began in May 1958. By this time Blue Danube had also become obsolete and the Air Ministry was reviewing where the new and more easily handled generation of atomic and thermonuclear weapons would be stored. During the operational life of the site, second and third generation British nuclear weapons were introduced: Red Beard, and Yellow Sun Marks I and II, but it is not clear if these were stored at Barnham. It is also unclear if any American nuclear weapons supplied for use by RAF Valiants at RAF Marham were held there. The site was being run down during 1962 and No 94 maintenance unit officially ceased to exist on 31 July 1963. Towards the end it appears to have been mainly a transit depot for fuel. RAF personnel, nevertheless, remained at the station until November. The closure of the station is probably directly linked to the operational deployment of the stand-off missile Blue Steel from late 1962.2.6.6 The site was retained by the RAF until late 1965 when it was offered for sale and eventually bought by Mr and Mrs Eldred in the following year. Initially they used the larger buildings for growing mushrooms, but gave this up after an outbreak of viral disease and began to let the buildings for storage and light industrial use. The changes made to individual buildings and structures since that time are set out in the gazetteer. The most significant loss has been the burning down of the non-nuclear store6.59 in the 1980s. Figs 8 and 9 show the very open appearance of the site when Mr and Mrs Eldred acquired. A few trees, which can be seen on Figs 6 and 7, had been retained from the clearance of Exclamation Spinney. In addition, some of the specimen broadleaved trees shown on Fig 3, plus some of the pines that can be seen in the photographs may also have been planted. Mr Eldred has planted Norway Spruce, although most of these have now been removed and there is a Scots Pine plantation in the sterile area. Most of the tree cover, however, is self-sown Scots Pine and Silver Birch.2.7 The Operation of the Atomic Weapons Store2.7.1 This can be discussed under two headings: the storage and maintenance of Blue Danube; and site security.Storage and Maintenance of Blue Danube2.7.2 The technology of Blue Danube is beyond the scope of this study and in any case a number of the files on it which are listed in the bibliography remain closed. Production has been described as a ‘cottage industry’ and the term appears to have covered a closely related range of devices, which were continuously modified. The following two paragraphs are largely taken from Wayne Cocroft’s report.2.7.3 The Mark 1 bomb was a relatively large weapon, 7.3m (24 ft) in length, 1.52m (5 ft) in diameter, and weighing 4636 kg (10,000 lbs). It looked like a standard free-fall high explosive bomb, with a pointed nose and rear stabilising fins and it appeared that the tail unit was a detachable section. It was lifted by means of a lifting beam attached to lugs on top of the central section of the bomb, which were also used to secure it in the bomb-bay of an aircraft.2.7.4 Atomic bombs were technologically complex products, which required specialised storage and continuous maintenance to remain serviceable. In the system by the RAF, the sub-critical plutonium fissile core was machined to form a hollow sphere at the centre of which was a neutron source. The core was surrounded by a carefully machined sphere of high explosives. When initiated this produced a spherical pressure wave on the sub-critical core imploding it to form a critical mass. Blue Danube bomb thus comprise two principal elements, the precisely shaped pieces of radioactive plutonium and the finely machined high explosive lenses wrapped around the core. The two elements were stored separately, partly to avoid storing assembled nuclear weapons, but also to maintain the effectiveness of the bomb. The early atomic bombs required an initiator made of polonium and (probably) lithium. Polonium is a highly unstable element, with a half-life of only 138 days. Any cores containing this material would therefore need to be reassembled every few months. The high explosive was a specialised composition which required careful manufacturing and machining to create the lenses around the radioactive core. This too needed to be kept in a carefully monitored environment.2.7.5 The 57 hutches for the fissile cores comprised 48 Type A (Photo 5) and 9 Type B (Photo 6). All except those in compartment 11 containeda mixture of Type A and Type B stores. Halpenny, who was a RAF dog handler at the site, states that the Type B hutches were for cobalt cores. However, there is some doubt that cobalt cores were ever developed. The hutches were linked by concrete paths xm (xft) wide, fenced by tubular steel pipes with strands of wire between the horizontal members. The groups of hutches were lit by pre-cast concrete lamp-posts, each of which had a red panic button at chest height. Drawing 3563B/52 shows roof plans designed to make the hutches appear as trees from the air. These were never used at Barnham or at Faldingworth, although some were built at Wittering.2.7.6 In the floor of each of the Type A stores is a single keyhole-shaped cavity for the fissile core. A scar around the hole indicates that it originally contained a vessel with the asphalt brought up around its lip. This is confirmed by the survival of the surrounding lip in similar stores at Faldingworth and by survival of stainless steel vessels at the bomb stores at Wittering and Gaydon, Warwickshire. Above the door of each hutch , and attached to its frame, a spring-loaded electrical contact probably recorded on the control board in building 3.63 whether or not the door was open or closed.2.7.7 The Type B hutches were slightly larger than the Type A and had two storage holes in their floors. At some point during the operational life of the station the holes in all the Type B stores were filled-in. The original floor was probably lifted and new floors laid. The significance of this is unclear. It maybe related to the withdrawal of Blue Danube and the deployment of Red Beard from 1961 or to the introduction of first British hydrogen bomb, Yellow Sun from 1958, but there is no documentary evidence that they were ever stored on the site.2.7.8 If the assertion that only 20 cores were ever produced is correct then the number at Barnham any one time would have been very small. It is not clear if the convoys described below were ever concerned with the movement of fissile cores between the Barnham and the airfields that it served, so that maintenance building 7.69 may have been only for the inspection of cores stored at the site. It was surrounded on three sides by a brick blast wall and was rectangular in plan with cut-away corners. Entry was through double steel doors to an entrance lobby and then a middle room. There was a small annexe on the north side. During the service life of this building there was a hole in the floor similar to those in the hutches. No information has been found on the inspection process.2.7.10 The non-nuclear stores 6.59, 8.60, 10.61 (Storage Buildings Type D-D) held the high explosive part of the bomb and its outer casing. Here, too, it is not clear if there was movement of parts and materials between Barnham and the airfields. The casing could be split into two units, the tail and forward part containing the high explosive and electronics: these were stored in separate parts of the building. The stores were constructed from reinforced concrete columns and beams as described in the gazetteer. Internally the main storage area was divided longitudinally into 11 bays and cross ways into three. At the front of the stores, flanking the entrances, were plant and switch rooms, which contained heating and air conditioning plant to maintain a stable environment within. A raised air extract duct was placed asymmetrically on the roofs.2.7.11 The weight and size of Blue Danube meant that gantries were necessary at the entrance to each store (Photo 7). Gantry 8.137 was straight. It was supported over the road by reinforced concrete columns, on which were two reinforced concrete beams. The upper beams tapered towards the entrance to the store where they were supported by two further columns. On the underside of the gantry a rolled steel joist runway beam was fitted with a hoist. The gantry was covered by asbestos sheeting. Gantries 6.127 and 10.145 were set at 30° to the fronts of the stores and an extra set of columns was placed at the 30 ° dogleg. Internally there is no evidence for a runway beam, so the bombs were probably lifted off a vehicle and loaded onto a bomb trolley for storage. It is not known how many bombs were kept in each store.2.7.11 Buildings 12.62 and 12.58 were presumably the main buildings used for the inspection of bombs brought from the airfields. The Operations Record Books mention 15-20 armed convoys a month covering 8,000 to 10,000 miles for the operational life of the site. Some of these were undoubtedly to test procedures, vehicles and methods of transporting bombs, but some must presumably have been transporting bombs or parts of bombs between the airfields and Barnham for servicing. Ten-ton trucks are referred to, and these may have been the Leyland Hippos that were used for transport within airfields. There is no mention of pantechnicons in the files examined, but there was a car park for them at Barnham and the RAF had Special Armament Pantechnicons, which were designed to carry a complete Special Weapon. If bombs or parts of bombs were delivered to the site by these vehicles, it is not clear how they were taken into the maintenance buildings2.7.12 Building 12.58 was designated Storage Building CD. The entrances were shielded by freestanding breeze block walls. Its construction was similar to the non-nuclear component stores, being formed from reinforced concrete columns and beams infilled with blockwork, but it was taller. There were air lock porches at the end, plus a plant and dark room at the back. There were no doors or access hatches between main central area and these compartments. The building could be entered from either end through the porches. The air lock was maintained by an interlocking mechanism which prevented the inner doors being opened until the outer doors were secured. There was a small store room and washroom and toilet on the east side of the north porch. The central section of the building was largely featureless except for a runway beam which ran its full length and supported four hoists2.7.13 The way that this building functioned is unknown. The air locks were too short to accommodate a fully assembled Blue Danube bomb, but the overhead runway would have allowed a warhead to be lifted off its trolley and moved into the central area. The dark room may have been for x-ray tests.2.7.14 How the other maintenance buildings worked is also unknown. Building 12.62 (Storage Building ED) was of solid concrete block construction with a flat reinforced concrete roof. It was originally T-shaped in plan, with the main room at the rear and a self-contained battery charging room at the front. Drg1246/53 has the legend that it should `be provided in accordance with the explosives regulations and all constructional metal work and windows, etc: to be bonded and earthed.' Building 12.85was not added until 1959 and was described as `Inspection and Repair Workshop.' It was brick built and glazed with tall Crittall windows in its east elevation. There were six bays with double sliding doors at either end. At the back there were offices and workshops. It is unlike the other maintenance buildings in being very well lit by natural light and was constructed at a time when Blue Danube was already obsolete. While it may have been related to the inspection and repair of new weapons it is also possible that it was simply a vehicle maintenance building.Security2.7.15 No attempt seems to have been made to camouflage the site from the air. The geometric shape partially cut into Exclamation Copse made it very prominent and the tree shapes for the hutch roofs were never used. Given the small number of warheads that the RAF actually possessed, it may be that the high visibility was intended to exaggerate the UK’s nuclear capacity.2.7.16 On the other hand, ground-level security was tight, although it is not clear if the main concern was espionage or protestors. There was a solid fence around the stores and hutches, then a sterile area free of trees and shrubs with the chainlink fence beyond and at least two coils of barbed wire on the outside, them the lost outer fence (4.17, 4.12). The right-angle bend in the approach road was surely intended to slow down any unauthorised vehicles. Entry into the pentagon was controlled by double gates at each of the two inner fences. Pedestrian access was through a steel gate adjacent to the main gates. There was a picket post (1.65) and presumably another barrier close to Elveden Road. There may have been observation towers on the corners of the chainlink fence and perhaps a public address system and perimeter from the start. An observation post on top of building 12.58 supplemented the towers and appears to date from the first phase of construction.2.7.17 During the second phase (Fig 5) buildings 3.75-80 were added. This may represent a change in security policy with more guard dogs and more facilities for the guards, although the SECO construction may indicate that this was a short-term measure. The result of these changes was to create a clutter of buildings within the sterile area which probably prompted the moving of the fences northwards to create a new clear area at some time between 1956 and 1959. As part of these alterations the inner electric gate was moved to its present position. Building 3.64 which lay just outside of the new gate was demolished - its foundations may still be seen. A small building 3.63a, today used as an estate office, was built on the west side of the gate, probably to control it.2.7.18 High security was maintained until the end of the site’s use. It was tested by periodic night-time exercises and a local inhabitant recalls ‘being driven past the unit when it was active. Evidently if your vehicle stopped on the main road for any reason at night, it would be illuminated by searchlight and a MOD Police Landrover would arrive within a minute’.2.8 Present StateCompartment 1: The Approach Road2.8.1 The approach road leaves Elveden Road heading due north for 230m (695 ft) before turning through a right angle bend to form a section 110m (333 ft) long. There is a chainlink fence (1.100) with a concrete path on the inside down both sides. Adjacent to Elveden Road the track from the upper site still be seen ending in a bellmouth. To the north are the Picket Post (1.65, now disused, describe construction and condition) the motor transport shed (1.68, now used for, condition) and two standby generator buildings (1.81, describe construction and condition now used for and 1.84 – now used for, construction and condition) between the latter is a concrete platform (1.101) that was originally a fuel compound. There are three concrete lamp standards with 20 mph signs on them along the road (1.102, Photo. 8) on the east side of the first section, and two after the bend. The road appears to be of conventional construction with asphalt (?) surfacing.2.8.2 To the north of 1.81 the fenced area narrows to the road plus narrow soft verges before it turns eastwards. Beyond the turn, the fenced corridor widens. On the south side the pantechnicon park has a temporary store of rubble and soil. Beyond this is the visitors’ car park. The chainlink fence in this section is in poor condition as a result of attempts to break into the site (Photo 9).2.8.3 On the east side of the road there is a grass verge partially used for storage by the businesses on the other side. The grass is dominated by fescues (Festuca spp) and bents (Agrostis spp), Yorkshire Fog (Holcus lanatus), Cock’s-foot (Dactylis glomerata) and mosses. Daffodils have been planted in it, as they have in many other parts of the site. There are young Scots Pines in the south, giving way to regularly-spaced Silver Birch to the north and a continuous row of Yew (Taxus baccata) after the bend. A few other ornamental species are present, notably Forsythia (Forsythia suspensa) and Western Red Cedar (Thuja plicata). The east verge is heavily shaded by the adjacent copses and the shrubs planted within it. It is largely without ground vegetation. The principal shrubs are Cherry Laurel (Prunus laurocerasus), Cotoneaster sp and Hazel (Corylus avellana). The adjacent copses, which are outside the site, are dominated by Silver Birch, Goat Willow (Salix caprea) and Scots Pine.Compartment 2: Outer Sector East2.8.4 This area contains two substantial buildings, the Duty Officer’s Quarters (2.67, now XX describe construction, condition etc) and building 2.106 behind it construction, use, etc . To the north are the Standby Set House (2.71) use, construction etc and the site of the Substation/Transformer (2.70), the surrounding wall of which survives. Describe paths and hard surfaces in this area. To the east is the disused Small Arms and Pyrotechnics Store (2.75). The open area to the east of the buildings was formerly used by Mr Eldred as a garden and the Stinging Nettle (Urtica dioica), Hemlock (Conium maculatum) and fruit trees are evidence of this. Young Wild Cherry (Prunus avium) and Hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna) and Bramble (Rubus fruticosus) are also present. This vegetation overlies patches of the moss and grassland vegetation found mainly within the Sterile Zone and described under that heading.Compartment 3: Outer Sector West2.8.5 This area is dominated by buildings and the only significant vegetation is the hedge planted along the southeast edge. The long, narrow administration and RAF police building (3.77, now used for XX and recently refurbished) with the guard room/control centre (3.63, now XX) at its southeast end is the principal building. To the south 3.111 is a covered water tank and pump for fire fighting. This was supplemented by the static water tanks 7.72, 9.73 and 11.74 arranged around the loop road. On its north side, from east to west are the Fire Station (3.66, constructed of XX and now used for xx), the Telephone Exchange (3.78 constructed of xxx and now used for xx) and the barrack building (3.76, constructed of xx and now xx). Beyond this there are two buildings, one of which was the mess block (3.77, constructed of xx and now XX) and the other ? modern addition construction and use? To the southwest, the small building 3.79 was the meat preparation store for the RAF police dogs and has recently been refurbished for use as XX.2.8.6 The north end of this compartment comprises a narrow triangle which was formerly the police dog compound. Building 3.110 used for XX constructed in XXX is at he north end and the X building (3.108, originally xxx and refurbished in xxx and used for Xx) is at the south end. The site of the dog kennels (3.80) is marked by a concrete platform. Adjacent to 3.63 the original outer gateway, 3.112, is marked by a hump in the roadCompartment 4: Fences and Sterile Area2.8.7 The chainlink fence (4.113) has four towers (4.114a-d) at the corners, with a fifth immediately to the east of the entrance road. On the inside the patrol path 4.122 is now largely covered with vegetation, but apparently intact. Mid-way on the north, northwest and east sides of the fence are look-out bastions, which allowed the external face of the fence to be observed. At the corners the fence has been extended outwards to create small square enclosures to accommodate the towers. General statement of condition of the fence and of the towers Searchlights in store Although some sections of the concrete panel fence (4.116) have collapsed (Photo. 3) and the fence is generally in poor condition, many sections appear as a solid barrier. Add. There were originally 70 lamp posts at Xm (xft) intervals around the sterile area and X of these survive generally in poor condition.2.8.8 Either side of the entrance there are mixed ornamental shrubberies: Juniper (Juniperus sp), Berberis thunbergii ‘Atropurpurea’ and other Berberis species on the west side, Cotoneaster and XX on the east.2.8.9 From the west edge of the entrance clockwise to the Scots Pine on the north side there are varying densities of Scots Pine, Silver Birch and Norway Spruce (Fig 3, Photo 2). The oldest trees are the Scots Pine but these are younger than the pines within the centre of the site, which may reflect the fact that the Sterile Area would have been kept clear of trees and shrubs up to the end of the life of the RAF station. In addition there are smaller numbers of Pedunculate Oak (Quercus robur) and Ash (Fraxinus excelsior). A hedge of Hawthorn, Field Maple (Acer campestre), Beech (Fagus sylvatica) and Oak (Hazel? Blackthorn?) was planted in X. abutting the fence It is generally unmanaged, but a section has been cut back at a high level and Mr Eldred intends to have the whole of the hedge laid over the next two years2.8.10 The ground flora is disturbed Breckland grassland which equates to the National Vegetation Classification (NVC) CG7b, the Cladonia sub community of Sheep’s Fescue (Festuca ovina), Mouse-ear-hawkweed (Hieracium pilosella) - Wild Thyme/Large Thyme (Thumus polytrichus/pulegiodes) grassland. In addition to Sheep’s Fescue, Crested Hair-grass (Koeleria macranta) is common together with the thymes. Field Woodrush (Luzula campestris), Common Mouse-ear (Cerastium fontanum) and Common Ragwort (Senecio jacobea) are characteristic plants, while the heavy rabbit grazing on the site has given rise to patches of Ground Ivy (Glechoma hederacea) and as a result of disturbance there is Stinging Nettle, Bramble, Borage (Borago officinalis) and Great Mullein (Verbascum thapsus). Perforate St John’s-wort (Hyperium perforatum) is also abundant. Apart from the characteristic patches of the lichen Cladonia, bryophytes are a particular characteristic of the site with large areas of Hypnum cypressiforme, Pseudoscleropodium purum, Homalothecium lutescens and Dicranum scoparium.2.8.11 The Scots Pine plantation is dense and has hardly any ground vegetation. Between the end of this plantation and the car-breakers yard there is another section of trees within grassland, although the tree cover is a little denser than elsewhere the vegetation has more species of disturbed ground, notably Stinging Nettle and Bramble.Compartment 5: West Hutches2.8.12 This area contains 16 hutches (5.1-13, 50, 51, 59) the condition of which is described in the gazetteer. They are linked by paths Xm (X ft) wide and many of the handrails alongside the paths are still present (Photo 10). There are the remains of a post-and wire-fence parallel to foot of the blast mound at the edge of compartment 6 which marks-off an area of more dense vegetation, with plants like Dog Rose (Rosa canina) and Hawthorn, than most of the rest of the compartment. There is, however, an equally dense area of oak, birch, poplar (Populus sp) and willow (Salix sp) in the south corner that shades building 12.85.2.8.13 Within the main part of this compartment there are individual large poplars and Ash (Fig 3) and a group of young oak around the edges of hutches 12.5 and 12.6 in addition to Norway Spruce, Silver Birch and Scots Pine. The open areas are similar to those in the sterile area, but with more frequent Bramble. In the southeast corner there is more varied vegetation with Holly (Ilex aquifolium).Compartment 6: West Stores2.8.14 The concrete base survives form the store and is now used for XX. Add info on footprint of gantry and other structures. The inner faces of the bank are dominated by coarse grasses, notably Cock’s-foot, Rye-grass (Lolium perenne) and XXX. The outer fence on the south side has dense Cotoneaster (Cotoneaster simonsii), Garden Privet (Ligustrum ovalifolium), Blackthorn (Prunus spinosa), Holly, birch, Hawthorn and oak. This type of vegetation continues around the west bank and the cover between the toe of the bank and the fences is similar to that in compartment 5. On the northeast side, dense scrub with frequent birch is present. The scrub consists of a mixture of native species and ornamental shrubs including Mock Orange (Philadelphus sp) and Cotoneaster simonsii. At the east end both banks end in retaining walls (6.130) corresponding with those on the opposite side of the loop road (13.150). Condition of wallsCompartment 7: North Hutches2.8.15 This area contains 14 hutches: 7.14-22 and 7.52-4. Summarise condition, state of rails and paths. At the south end the inspection room 7.69 is now used for X. Condition. East of this is one of the static water tanks (7.72) with two small ponds on the north side. There are two well-formed Sweet Chestnut (Castanea sativa) in early maturity near the south edge and groups of (probably) Small-leaved Lime (Tilia cordata) to the north (Fig 3) These trees were deliberately planted but the rationale behind this is not obvious. There is similar planting at Faldingworth. There are too few trees for it to be a significant attempt at camouflage. There is also some more recent planting such as the Prunus subhirtella adjacent to the inspection building andCotoneaster,Hellboruscorsicus and Cistus on the bank facing the road. Is the Horse Chestnut here? Most of the vegetation is a mosaic of Silver Birch and Scots Pine with a largely open area at the centre but with a clump of Norway Spruce at the east edge.2.8.16 The tank is dominated by the alien plant New Zealand Stonecrop (Crassula helmsii) but also contains Water Milfoil (Myriophyllum X) and Water Lily (Nymphea alba).Compartment 8: North Stores2.8.17 The non-nuclear store 8.60 survives and has been divided into X units which were used for XXX. General condition of building. The gantry 8.137 also survives. Summarise condition. The gantry roof has largely/completely been removed but sections of it are stored at xxx.2.8.18 The inner banks of the blast mounds (8.138) are largely grass-dominated (species) although there is a band of scrub on the west side and in the northeast corner. The north bank is immediately adjacent to the concrete panel fence but there are two large (? birch check) on it and quite dense scrub with Bramble. Because this is the highest point on the site the outer banks are slight. The vegetation is similar to the outer banks of compartment 6 with frequent Cotoneaster, birch, Bramble and occasional oak, notably a scrub oak at the south edge. The east bank has mixed scrub in which Sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus) is quite frequent. As with the other blast mounds, they end in retaining walls (8.139) with roses overhanging the edge. The narrow beds at the foot of the walls contain Cotoneaster and Berberis.Compartment 9: Northeast Hutches2.8.19 This compartment contains 11 hutches: number 9.25-32 and 9.55-57. The paths serving them are cut into the slope and there are no handrails. Describe state of hutches and of paths A Static Water Tank (9.73) is also present. This contains Bulrush (Typha latifolia), Water Lily and Reed Canary-grass (Phalaris arundinacea).2.8.20 Like Compartment 7 it contains planted deciduous trees dating from about the time that the site was operational (Fig 3), but in this case they are Beech and there is also a False Acacia (Robinia pseudoacacia). The cover of Pine and Birch is denser in this area than to the west and there are some good individual pines which may be contemporary with the Beech. There is a partially dense group of pines adjacent to compartment 8 and a mixture of pines and broadleaved trees, including oak, adjacent to compartment 10.Compartment 10: West Stores2.8.21 The non-nuclear store 10.31 survives and is used for Describe condition and use. The gantry 10.145 also survives, although it is partially/completely without its roof. bits of roof stored? Describe condition.2.8.22 The inner face of the banks is predominantly grass and XX, but there are patches of scrub at the west end of the north bank and XX. The Hawthorn and Blackthorn scrub on the outer face of the east bank is dense, but a well-formed Beech similar to those to the north emerges from it. As in compartments 6 and 8 the banks end in retaining walls (10. 146) with roses overhanging them. Shrubs at base of wall?Compartment 11: Southeast Hutches2.8.23 This area contains 16 hutches, 11.33-48. General state of hutches, paths and rails. This part of the site lay within Exclamation Copse and a few Sweet Chestnuts from within the copse (Fig 3) were allowed to re-grow to form the trees in early maturity which now characterise the area. There are also limes similar to those in compartment 7 and a few Scots Pines which are probably contemporary within them. But as in compartments 5,7 and 9 most of the vegetation is much younger pine and birch with occasional Norway Spruce. There are more open areas at the centre and in the west corner. Here Bramble and fragments of Breckland grassland with Stinging Nettle and XX is present. At the west end the water tank 11.74 is dry but largely in tact and two small ponds have been dug next to it. What’s the structure to the SW of the Bank?Compartment 12: Central Area South2.8.24 The tall storage building 12.63 now used for XX dominates this area. Summary of condition. It is separated from storage building 12.62, now used for xx and as an office by Mr Eldred by a mound with Scots Pine on it. Condition etc To the east and west of the building there is ornamental planting comprising mixed ornamental shrubs including a very large Buddleia against the wall on the east side and a mossy bank with roses, Buddleia cf globosa and other ornamental species on the east side. There is a large Goat Willow at the west edge. The blast walls 12.152 either side of the mound are substantially intact and the areas between the walls and the road verge have also been planted with ornamental shrubs. On the west side these include Ceanothus, Berberis, Choisia ternata and Cotoneaster simonsii. As in other beds the plants are mature (and senescent in the case of Ceanothus) and drawn as a result of the restricted light. On the east side the shrubs include Buddleia davidii, Cotoneaster, Potentilla fruticosa and Berberis.2.8.25 South of 12.62 there is a small triangular bank with abundant mosses, but also Buddleia and Cotoneaster. In the southwest part of this area the inspection and repair workshop 12.85 with its brick construction and large Crittal windows a contrast with the rest of the buildings on the site and is used by Xxs for Xx. Condition?There is a bed in front of it with Cotoneaster simonsii, roses and XX. The large poplar and spruce on the edge of compartment 5, plus the coppiced oak and Sycamore to the south, shade the building.Compartment 13: Central Area North2.8.26 This comprises a mound of the same height as the blast mounds for the stores around a central area which is probably at the original level. It has developed as mixed woodland with a greater density of trees than elsewhere. These are mainly Scots Pine and Silver Birch, but oak, Sweet Chestnut and XX are also present. The density of trees is such that there is very little ground cover. A similar range of tree species grows on the outer faces of the banks, but there are also extensive areas ofCotoneaster simonsii together with some Hazel and Hawthorn plus some Ash regeneration.2.8.27 The corners of the rounded square end in retaining walls 13.156 and there is ornamental planting in the beds at the bases of these. The plants include Mahonia, Berberis, Cotoneaster spp, Viburnum burkwoodii, Choisia and bamboo (cfPseudosasa japonica).Compartment 14: The Septic Tank2.8.28 xx3. SIGNIFICANCES3.1 National3.1.1 The site is of national significance for the following reasons.— Nuclear weapons were the ‘defining technology of the Cold War’. The site demonstrates many features of the management of the early nuclear deterrent.— In particular it demonstrates a particular phase of 1950s technology which was soon superseded by more advanced systems.— The site was very prominent and apparently designed to give of far greater nuclear capability that was actually the case, indicating the gap between the UK’s military aspirations in the 1950s and its real resources.— Barnham was one of only two sites of its type and is more complete (?) than the second at RAF Faldingworth.— The site has group value when considered with the associated airfields.— Several of the groups of buildings are of national significance in their own right.The Cold War3.1.2 The years 1950-1963 were the Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) phase of the First Cold War and were perhaps the period when a full-scale nuclear conflict was most likely to have broken out. The Barnham Atomic Weapons Store was central to the UK’s strategy of a major nuclear attack on Communist Block countries in the first days of a war, which was the essence of MAD. If a war had broken out the UK would not have had the necessary nuclear arsenal and would have had to rely on the United States for support. The irony is that there was no means of delivering Blue Danube until the V-bomber force was operational, by which time Blue Danube had been superseded.Early Nuclear Technology3.1.3 The technology of Blue Danube and the atomic bombs was cruder than the H-bomb and thermonuclear devices that replaced them from 1961 onwards. A very large bomb requiring special lifting and transporting equipment was needed. It had complex and fragile assemblies required a very high level of monitoring and maintenance. These features are reflected in the gantries, the inspection buildings and the overall layout of the site.A Bluff?3.1.4 It is difficult to understand why the site was so prominent (Figs 4.6.7), with no attempt at even the most basic concealment from the air, unless it was intended to be both a statement of the UK’s readiness to use nuclear weapons and an exaggeration of this capacity to do so. In its present form the site is quite well absorbed into the landscape, but the 1950s it would have been a major landmark on the ground and from the airCompleteness3.1.5 The layout and almost all of the 1950s buildings survive. The Seco buildings have been altered in the course of making them serviceable for light industrial use (Henry to add) but the Seco construction survives. There are interior alterations to the stores and one has been lost, but its footprint remains. The earthworks, retaining walls and all of the hutches remain. The contrast with RAF Faldingworth (http://www.subbrit.org.uk/rsg/sites/f/faldingworth/index.html) which served a similar function to Barnham for the Lincolnshire airfields is interesting. Here the non-nuclear stores and gantries survive in better condition and the earthworks are intact and well-maintained with grass cover. But most of the hutches have been removed and the inner fence (all of the 1950s fences?) has been removed. Faldingworth was used as an operational store for the adjacent RAF Scampton and it acquired additional features like type D1 mounded nuclear preparation buildings. Thus while some individual features at Faldingworth are in a better state of preservation, Barnham is unique in largely intact and being a single phase and single function site.Group Value3.1.6 Barnham was designed to support the East Anglia V bomber airfields of Wittering, Wyton, Honington and Marham. Some (all?) of these airfield have the surviving stores for the six bombs that would have been kept at the airbase. Add and check if other facilities also survive.Individual Buildings and Groups3.1.7 In a site as completed as the present one, it could be argued that all features are of national significance because they contribute to that completeness. However, the following can be regarded as being of national significance as individual groups:— each cluster of hutches including paths and handrails;— all of the stores and inspection buildings (8.60, 7.69, 10.61, 12.58, 12.62, 12.85) and the gantries 8.39, 10.146;— all of the earthworks.3.1.8 The buildings within compartments 1-3 can perhaps be regarded as being of lower significance because they are largely of a type that would be found at most securely guarded military sites and there have been significant internal alterations. For instance, the control panels for the security hutches have been removed. The fence system and towers perhaps also fall into this category.3.2 Regional Significance3.2.1 The site is of regional significance for its relationship to a group of military sites in the Thetford area and individual buildings and structures are of regional significance.Military Sites in the Thetford Area3.2.2 The site is contiguous with the remains of the Second World War explosives storage site and a short distance away form the Little Heath Mustard Gas storage site. Part of the present site was used for Mustard Gas storage, although there is now no evidence of this. This represents an interesting range of military uses within a small area.Individual Buildings and Structures3.2.3 Following the point made in 3.1.8 the buildings within Compartments 1-3, the fences and the observation towers can be regarded as being of regional significance in demonstrating the management and supply of services to a high-security military site. Or are the towers so uncommon and complete that they are of national significance?3.3 Nature Conservation Significance3.3.1 There is no obvious difference between the better areas of Breckland grassland within the site and the grassland within the SSSI. If the boundaries of the SSSI were to be reassessed now it is possible that the west side of the sterile area would be included within the SSSI. There are also good ornithological records for the site and the following uncommon and rare species are found close to the site and could occur within itMoonwort Botrychium lunariaPerennial Knawel Scleranthus perennis prostratusSeaside Pansy Viola tricolor curtisiiWild Pansy Viola tricolorShepherd's Cress Teesdalia nudicaulisDittander Lepidium latifoliumMossy Stonecrop Crassula tillaeaHoary Cinquefoil Potentilla argenteaPurple Milk-Vetch Astragalus danicusSickle Medick Medicago sativa falcataBur Medick Medicago minimaClustered Clover Trifolium glomeratumHound's-Tongue Cynoglossum officinaleWhite Horehound Marrubium vulgareBreckland Thyme Thymus serpyllumBreckland Spiked Speedwell Veronica spicata spicataWall Bedstraw Galium parisienseSmall Scabious Scabiosa columbariaSmooth Cat's-Ear Hypochaeris glabraField Mugwort Artemisia campestrisPurple Fescue Vulpia ciliata ambiguaLoose Silky-Bent Apera spica-ventiPurple-Stem Cat's-Tail Phleum phleoidesPhilonthus lepidus Philonthus lepidusLunar Yellow Underwing Noctua orbonaGreat Crested Newt Triturus cristatusViviparous Lizard Lacerta viviparaGrass Snake Natrix natrixRock Dove Columba liviaNightjar Caprimulgus europaeusBlack Redstart Phoenicurus ochruros3.4 Detractors3.4.1 There are a number of features which detract from the site’s heritage significance, although not from its day-to-day use as an industrial estate. (There is a separate point about the fragility of the precast concrete and Seco which is made in Issues) They are:— the poor state of some sections of fence, not so much where the chainlink has decayed as where posts have been partially pushed over;— the collapse of some of the section of concrete panel fence;the clutter of containers and equipment at the site entrance;the loss of the open character evident on Figs 8-9 and associated with a military site through the development of a substantial tree and shrub cover by natural regeneration and ornamental planting. (Probably need to discuss this issue and make the point that the site is not a military museum.)4. ISSUES4.1 GeneralThe issues for the conservation of the site can be discussed under the following headings:the overall approach to conservation;lack of knowledge;archiving and storage;planning status and appropriate uses;vegetation management and nature conservation;earthworks;conservation of reinforced concrete structures;conservation of buildings in brick and other materials;conservation of Seco buildings;drainage and services;parking;external storage;external treatment of buildings and external works;security and the site boundary.4.1 The Overall Approach to Conservation4.1.1 An overall approach to the conservation of the site which is compatible with its use as an industrial estate is needed. This should be based on the significances of the site described above, but also be realistic. For instance it is not feasible to arrest the decay of the reinforced concrete structures and it would not be financially possible to reconstruct them, nor would this be in accordance with current conservation practice. The overall approach therefore needs to take into account the following.— the importance and legibility of the plan of the site, the relationships between buildings and its completeness;— the character of the site’s landscape;— the national significance of the features directly associated with Blue Danube- the hutches, inspection buildings, earthworks, gantries;— the regional significance of the Seco buildings and the fences, observation towers and other features associated with site security.4.1.2 In order to set policies that will achieve this overall approach this section first identifies gaps in knowledge and the principles of conservation that may be appropriate, followed by planning issues that could affect the site and its buildings as a whole, and subsequently looks at landscape issues. The issues arising from the principal building types are discussed, followed by more detailed issues.4.2 Lack of Knowledge4.2.1 There are substantial gaps in our knowledge of the site and therefore the extent to which the significance of some features and particularly the details of individual buildings can be assessed and conserved. The most significant issues are set out below:Until the Blue Danube files are de-classified it is not possible to obtain a proper understanding of how the inspection buildings worked.— No significant information has been found in the monitoring of the fissile cores, how many there were at any one time, how they were handled or how the inspection buildings worked.— The different purposes of the Type A and Type B hutches is not clear. The only mention of the use Type B for cobalt is by Halpenny who is unlikely to have had a full knowledge of the operational use of the site.No evidence has been found on why the site was allowed, or indeed designed, to be so prominent. It is easy to speculate on the fact that this may have been a bluff, but was it really the case?Although Mr Eldred has plans of many of the buildings he does not have the following nor are they at The National Archives or the RAF Museum.1244/53 CD Storage building713/53 Stand-by set house4231A/54 Small arms ammunition and pyrotechnics4231A/54 Barrack accommodation4231A/54 Mess blockArchitect’s drawing Telephone exchange9118A/53 Dogs compound 10 runs713C/53 1000 kw Stand-by set houseGymnasiumStand-by set house 84Toilet blockPicket PostIf they could be recovered it would help with the conservation of the buildings.4.3 Archiving, Recording and Storage4.3.1 The plans held by Mr Eldred are listed in the bibliography. They are now fragile. Since they have all been scanned it may be that they should be stored in appropriate conditions in an archive.4.3.2 The gazetteer gives a record of the present state of buildings and structures. Records of repairs and modifications will be kept by Mr Eldred in the normal course of business, but these would not necessarily be at the level of detail for proper historic building recording and none of the structures is a listed building.4.3.3 As buildings and structures are repaired and modified, original elements such as window frames will probably replaced. It is normal conservation practice to record these and if possible to put them into store. There are some suitable locations on the site, such as the hutches, but a systematic approach to what is to be retained is needed4.4 Planning Status and Appropriate Uses of Buildings4.4.1 The site is zoned for B1, B2 and B8 use. There is no evidence in the local plan of pressure for other types of use or any intention to change categories. Moreover, and the nature of the site and its buildings, regardless of its heritage significance, means that the range of potential uses is limited without major rebuilding. It is unlikely, therefore, that there will be pressure for major changes to the overall pattern of use of the site.4.4.2 However, the Heath and Safety and energy conservation requirements on employers are exacting and likely to become more so. As new businesses move in and existing businesses develop there may be pressure to make changes to the buildings and structures that would adversely affect their significance, particularly if the local authority planning officers and building control officer are not fully informed on what that significance is. Acceptable types of change for buildings therefore need to be agreed, rather than arguing case-by-case4.5 Vegetation Management and Nature Conservation4.5.1 During its operational life the site was managed in the same spick-and-span style as other military sites with few trees, no shrubs and mown grass. This also made the functional relationships between buildings readily apparent. A return to this landscape is feasible. Moreover, the grassland that would spread if the clearance were to allow natural regeneration would be very similar to that of the adjacent SSSI. Grassland of high nature conservation interest is a frequent feature of older historic sites but would be an unusual an interesting one for a Cold War one.4.5.2 However, Mr Eldred’s preference is for grassland with a light covering of trees as can be seen in Photo 2. Since light tree cover diversifies the range of birds present this has wildlife advantages. It should therefore be possible to devise a programme of heaving thinning to create vegetation similar to the more open places in the sterile area across the whole of the site while carrying out other measures that will benefit wildlife, such as management of the ponds.4.5.3 In addition, ornamental planting has become a feature of the site. Although this conflicts with the military character, the original landscape can be ‘read’ through it and since quite a few of the shrubberies are now over-mature, it should be possible to devise a landscaping style which has colour and variety without masking historic features.4.5.4 The perimeter hedge is also an issue. It will be laid over the next two years, so that the chainlink fence boundary will become much more legible, but it has trees planted quite frequently within it, and if theses are left as standards they will largely undo the benefits of laying the hedge.4.6 Earthworks4.6.1 All the original earthworks survive. There is no information on the method of construction, but it seems likely that they would have been built-up in layers of compacted chalk, with only a thin layer of top soil since it was only intended to support grass. Where trees have grown up on this shallow soil there is a very real danger that they will be blown over, resulting in damage to the bank as the root plate turns over. In addition where the scrub is so dense that there is no ground vegetation, there is already evidence of surface erosion.4.7 Conservation of Reinforced Concrete Structures4.7.1 Henry – measures of the non-nuclear stores and other buildings apparently OK with a reinforced concrete framework.- can we do anything about the gantries? strategy for dismantling?- fence and fence posts – a decision between allowing it to become a pile of rubble and removal of section as it becomes dangerous.4.8 Conservation of Buildings in Brick and other Structures4.8.1 Henry Towers?4.9 Conservation of Seco Buildings4.9.1 Henry4.10 Drainage and Services4.10.1 Henry4.11 Parking4.11.1 Extensive parking detracts from the site but it would only cause significant damage to the heritage interest if there was pressure to create parking bays off the loop road or to create parking spaces around individual buildings. One way of reducing this pressure would be to look at ways of improving the main parking area.4.12 External Storage4.12.1 The site has planning permission for storage, but there is no doubt that the external storage at the site entrance and the car breaker’s yard are detractors. The former is largely temporary, but one of the major disadvantages of the car breaker’s yard is that it closes down the sterile area. It may be necessary to consider a long-term approach of restricting businesses that require extensive external storage the less conspicuous locations. For example the extensive storage on 6.59 has limited impact.4.13 External Treatment of Buildings and External Works4.13.1 External surfaces – Henry.4.13.2 The concrete paths around the site are generally in very good condition and there seems no reason why buried paths cannot be exposed and brought into use where this serves some purpose. On the other hand there is no need to disturb paths such as the fence path which ate best preserved beneath their layers of vegetation. Where they have been exposed/reconstructed and the adjacent areas put down to gravel as around building 3.77 the effect is an entirely appropriate setting for the buildings. Add comments on hard surfaces elsewhere4.14 Security4.14.1 The chainlink fence is the main security feature across the site as a whole that relates to this plan. It is decaying and some of the posts are collapsing. It would be feasible to manage the hedge to provide a dense, impenetrable screen for pedestrians which would also define the outer hedge as a feature. Henry please add info about the conservation of the posts.4.14.2 However there have been have been attempts to drive vehicles into the site in the east edge, seriously damaging the fence. Stronger measures are needed here, but they need to ensure that the fence is legible as a distinct feature.4.14.3 In addition, individual tenants want to make their own security arrangements and fences need to avoid impacts on individual buildings.5. POLICIES5.1 Policy 1: To develop a management strategy for the site based on the national significance of the site as a whole and the relative significances of its component partsReason: Many aspects of the conservation of the site can be managed through the more detailed policies set out below but the importance of the footprint of the Atomic Weapons Store, the buildings and structures associated with Blue Danube , and the completeness of the site need to underlie all other policies and actions5.2 Policy 2: To improve knowledge of the purpose and design of the buildings through further researchReason: There are many gaps in our knowledge of RAF Barnham. Some of these are of general historical interest rather than directly relevant to a conservation plan. However, there is a particular need to understand exactly how the inspection buildings, how the non-nuclear stores were laid out and to recover the missing plans of the buildings in order to inform conservation and repair.5.3 Policy 3: To ensure that the documents held on site are adequately archived and accessibleReason: The scans of the plans held on site and included in this plan can be easily used and there is no need to use the fragile original documents day-to-day.5.4 Policy 4:To record significant changes to the buildings and structures and to store redundant materials in a systematic wayReason: This accords with good conservation practice and there are suitable storage facilities on site5.5 Policy 5: To monitor the planning status of the siteReason: The permitted uses of the buildings on the site reflect the way that it has developed over the last 40 years. Proposals to change to different types of use or to stop some uses may have a radical impact on the buildings and their surroundings.5.6 Policy 6: To identify potential conflicts between current Health and Safety and energy conservation requirements and the integrity of the buildings and to establish guidelines to avoid these.Reason: Uninformed compliance with regulations could lead to inappropriate changes to buildings.5.7 Policy 7: To develop a light tree covering over Breckland grassland across as much of the site as possible.Reason: The site was originally stark and prominent in an open landscape. Removal of the trees and shrubs would restore one of the most characteristic features of the site and would create grassland potentially of equivalent nature conservation value to that within the SSSI. However a light covering of trees in addition to the planted broadleaves would not be a significantly different and is favoured by Mr Eldred.5.8 Policy 8: To develop a nature conservation strategy for the site.Reason: The site has considerable nature conservation potential and is surrounded by a Site of Special Scientific Interest. Measures can be easily integrated with management of the historic landscape.5.9 Policy 9: To enhance robust planting in the beds already used that does not have a detrimental effect on the historic landscape.Reason: Although ornamental planting would not have been a feature of the Cold War site, the current beds can be developed to give features which do not significantly detract from it.5.10 Policy 10: To ensure that the original form of the earthworks is conservedReason: The earthworks are one of the most significant features of the site. At present there is a danger that they could be damaged by collapsing trees or erosion.5.11 Policy 11: Policy for the Conservation of the Reinforced Concrete Inspection Buildings – Henry.Reason:5.12 Policy 12: Policy for the management of decay of the fence and gantries HenryReason: EH would probably prefer the fence to decay in situ, but surely all that this will do is create unmanageable piles of rubble. Suggest that the policy should be to allow the fence to decay and to remove it section by section as it becomes dangerous. The line of fence could be marked, but is an inner fence needed today for security? Measures to stop the decay of the gantries? Putting the roof back on? Is there a point where they become dangerous and have to be dismantled.5.13 Policy 13: Policy for the conservation of other buildingsReason:5.14 Policy 14: Policy for SECO Buildings – Henry.Reason:5.15 Policy 15: To investigate how the site surface water drainage works – Henry don’t think we need policies for other services. Perhaps foul sewerage.Reason:5.16 Policy 16: To minimise the impact of parking spaces on the siteReason: The park space at the site entrance is underused and parking around the buildings on a loop road does not have a permanent effect on the site, but the gradual accumulation of parking bays adjacent to the road or around individual buildings could.5.17 Policy 17: To minimise the amount of external storageReason: The present external storage has a detrimental effect on the setting of individual buildings and the landscape in general. Are tenants requiring external storage more profitable than those who don’t?.5.18 Policy 18: To establish guidelines for the treatment of external surfacesReason: The treatment of external surfaces in Compartment 3 has been very successful and a good practice here should be continued.5.19 Policy 19: To provide a robust site boundary which conserves features of the original chainlink fence but which keeps the site secureReason: Most of the original wire in the chainlink has decayed, some of the posts ae deteriorating and have collapsed in parts of the east side. There have been attempts to drive into the site through the fence and a secure boundary is needed.6. MANAGEMENT STRATEGY6.1 The polices given in the previous section can be implemented through a management strategy based on the following principles:an up-to-date information base (policy 2);a systematic approach to recording change and storing original materials (policies 3,4)— continuing the present range of business uses but monitoring changing demand and the impact that this and environmental legislation could have on the buildings and structures (policies 5,6);— reducing tree cover to a light density of trees, conserving earthworks and developing the site’s nature conservation potential (policies 7-10);managing the decay of the precast concrete features (policy 12);carrying out work to buildings and external surfaces within agreed guidelines (policies 11-13,14,18);minimising external storage and the permanent footprint of car parking (policies 16,17);ensuring adequate services (policy 15);— providing a secure site boundary (policy 19).6.2 Information Base6.2.1 There are at least four potential sources of further information about the site and its buildings in addition to the files that are still closed at TNA:documents still held by Defence Estates;documents that may have survived with those for RAF Faldingworth when papers were transferred there when Barnham closed;standard plans for buildings that may have survived for other sites;recollections of people who served at RAF Barnham.It will take some time to investigate these sources and the best way forward is to find a military historian through the Airfields Research Group who would take an interest in the site. The chairman of the group lives in Thetford.6.3 Recording Change and Storing Materials6.3.1 The gazetteer gives a good record of the present state of buildings and the work that has been carried out, and a record can be kept of future changes as digital photographs as well as archiving plans and specifications. It is also recommended that the original 1950s plans are placed in an archive, either the Suffolk Records Office or the RAF museum.6.3.2 The hutches are appropriate places to store original artefacts from the site, provided that there is no impact on the structures or their ventilation, but the process has to be selective and items put into store should meet the following criteria:Henry6.4 Monitoring Change and Complying with Environmental Requirements6.4.1 Changing demand will be apparent from the applications made for tenancies, but Mr Eldred or his successors may want actively to seek tenants requiring different types of facilities from those available at present , for example buildings with a high level of natural light, larger buildings, installation of plant, electrical apparatus etc. Since the buildings are not listed, the best way of avoiding significant damage to their historic interest is to agree checklists of acceptable and unacceptable change that would guide the planning authority. In general terms these would be xxxxxx Henry More detailed guidelines for individual types of building are given in sections xx.6.4.2 More stringent environmental requirements than might come into force when new uses are proposes could include such things as increased insulation, treatment of asbestos, changes to ventilation, etc. These, too, should take account of the guidelines6.5 Management of VegetationThinning of trees6.5.1 Work in reducing the density of trees is already in hand. It would be advisable to carry out the clearance in the following sequence:— continue with the current clearance of the sterile area;clear vegetation that may be directly affecting buildings such as the hutches as soon as possible;clear the Scots Pine plantation;— clear each group of hutches in turn – there is no particular priority between groups;— clear the area behind building 12.85;— while the clearance of compartment 13 would be ideal this is of lower priority and significance and could perhaps be left as a woodland copse while avoiding substantial tree growth on the banks.Provided that the clearance is done gradually and fires are kept to a small number of sites, there should be very little scrub invasion since rabbits will graze the cleared areas. If rabbit grazing declines, it may be possible to reach agreement within the Norfolk Wildlife Trust for light grazing on the site.6.5.2 The limes Sweet Chestnut, Pedunculate Oak, Ash and Beech should be retained as features of the Cold war landscape. The poplars may also date from this time, but they sucker and form thickets. They are short-lived trees which are prone to collapse as they become over-mature. It would be advisable to kick-off or regularly cut back the current crop of suckers and to fell the poplars when they become over-mature, grinding the sumps, treating the re-growth with brushwood killer and replanting with Small-leaved Lime. Norway Spruce should be removed completely because it casts such a dense shade and Sycamore because it is so invasive. The Scots Pine plantation has no commercial value, but the price of imported timber even for fence posts etc is so high at present that there could be some sales of the pine to offset the cost of felling and clearance if the work was carried out now.Maintaining the Earthworks6.5.3 There are now some quite large trees on the banks. These could damage the earthworks if they blow over. It would be advisable to fell these and treat the stumps of broadleaved trees with brushwood killer. An alternative would be to coppice the trees or the crowns could be heavily reduced. Conifers will not re-grow when they have been cut.6.5.5 The inner faces of the banks already have grassland and this can be maintained (is maintained) by periodic mowing- by the tenant? Ideally, all of the scrub in the outer faces should be removed but this should be done gradually in small bands parallel to the slope. Each cleared area should be treated with brushwood killer and mown at least once a year. The alternative is to have a short rotation coppice, but this is time consuming.Ornamental Planting6.5.6 Quite a lot of the ornamental planting is mature or over mature and plants such as the Ceanothus need to be replaced, elsewhere plants have become leggy and need cutting back. In a few shaded areas Potentillas and Cistuses have been planted in areas that are too shaded for them to grow and flower well.6.5.7 The main impact on the ornamental planting on the Cold War landscape is where plants above eye-level partially mask walls such as the retaining walls of the mounds. If these areas can gradually be reduced in height so that there is colourful and varied planting at or below eye-level and the scale and overall appearance of the structures and buildings is apparent, than a satisfactory compromise will have been reached. This can be achieved through the following steps.— Remove the over-mature shrubs and replant with shrubs such as Berberis, Cotoneaster, Pittosporum, Ribes, Symphoricarpos, Skimma and the lower- growing species of bamboo in the shaded areas. Keith- happy to suggest lots more about the planting if you want it— Where there is sufficient sun, continue planting Cistus, lavenders etc. These are short-lived plants and will need renewing quite frequently— Cut back or remove plants growing above eye level, or at least not replace them when they die. Some of the species present such as Cotoneaster simonsii will respond well to coppicing.Nature Conservation6.5.8 The opening-up of the vegetation described above will encourage patched of Breckland grassland to form and the lighter tree cover will be suitable for a range of bird species. It will also encourage butterflies and other invertebrates. Although leaving dead wood is normally recommended for nature conservation, since the woody vegetation is recent and a lot of it is softwood there is little to be gained from doing this and piles of wood will impair the development of grassland. On the other hand, bare surfaces and exposed decaying brickwork can be of value for specialist invertebrates and this need to be considered when repairs are being undertaken.6.5.9 The water tanks have potential as wildlife habitats and are likely to support invertebrates such as dragonflies if they are not stocked with fish. The invasive Crassula should be removed as soon as possible since this is suppressing the development of a native flora. Bulrush and Reed Canary-grass are also very vigorous plants and need to be kept in check. The Suffolk wildlife trust will be able to advise on sources of native plants that will diversify the vegetation, particularly submerged plants that will help oxygenate the still water. The lack of a regular water supply and of any significant movement of the water restrict the development of a stable system, and if there are ways of small-scale, regular topping up or aerating the water gently, particularly in periods of hot weather, these should be followed up.6.5.10 While it is possible that Great Crested Newts may colonise the water tanks, the protected species most likely to occur on the site are bats. They could roost in roof voids or even on the exteriors of buildings. It is also possible that the edges of the vegetation may be commuting and feeding routes. All species of bat are protected by law and it is an offence to disturb then. It is strongly recommended that the Suffolk Bat Group (http://www.suffolkwildlife.co.uk/bats/index.htm) be invited to carry out emergence checks across the whole site and to follow this up with inspection of potential roost sites. That will be able to advise on bat conservation and on any measures necessary if bats are likely to be disturbed during construction work.6.6 Managing the Decay of the Reinforced Concrete StructuresThe Gantries6.6.1 State what can be done to preserve then in situ. Timescale for point at which they will have to be dismantled.The Concrete Fence6.6.2 There is no practical way of conserving the concrete fence and if it is left to decay without management it would become an unmanageable piece of rubble. It is therefore proposed to monitor the fence and dismantle each section as it becomes dangerous – what do we do with the dismantled bits – do we cut of the posts at ground level or taken them out. Can we leave something upstanding to mark the positions of the posts that is not a hazard? Please expandThe Posts on the Chainlink Fence6.6.3 These posts are generally in better condition than the inner fence, but will nevertheless continue to decay Do we replace them, or remove when dangerous. What form of fence do we put in its place – see below. . Are they still manufactured as a stock item? If they have to be made-up could a batch be stockpiled? Is there any point in replacing the posts without replacing the wire?6.7 Work to Buildings and External Surfaces6.7.1 Henry please insert text for buildings here.6.7.2 For external hard surfaces hard I think we simply suggest like-for-like replacements. For the loop road etc it seems likely that the construction would have been typical MOD and very robust, so that the only issue will be the renewal of the wearing course as on any other site. The concrete paths also seem very robust and the sections that I’ve seen do not seem to need any repair. What about concrete aprons in front of buildings?6.7.3 Where gravel has been laid between the paths and the building in compartment 3 this is very successful and the detail can be used elsewhere around the buildings Finally there are areas which appear just to be compacted or to have gravel rolled in, as in compartment 3. Is there any need for change to these? Perhaps scraping to a better level and rolling more gravel in?6.8 External Storage and Car Parking6.8.1 There is probably little that can be done to reduce the impact of the car breaker’s yard and the external storage at the site entrance without affecting the way that the businesses work, so the best time for change would be when the existing tenancies expire. Ideally the car breaker’s yard should be returned to open land so that the sterile area is fully reinstated. However, if use of the area for similar enterprises is to continue, the following measures could be undertaken:set the storage area further back from the edge of the road and remove the shrubberies alongside the road so that the sterile area can be clearly seen:reinstate the fence and set conditions preventing storage within a certain distance;future of the building?At the roadside there is little alternative to seeking tenants who would just use the buildings and require minimal external space.6.8.2 The appropriate use of the concrete base of the non-nuclear store 6.59 for storage has already been noted. Other appropriate areas are………6.8.3 When the rubble has been moved from the pantechnicon park there will be room forX tenants’ vehicles and they should be encouraged to use it. A longer term option for parking would be to use the site of the breaker’s yard for parking when that tenancy expires. Need a calculation of the demand for parking for people travelling to the site to work, as opposed to works vehicles, delivery vans etc. How much space is there for parking in front of the non-nuclear stores? Could this be better laid out?6.9 ServicesHenry6.10 Securityere Her6.10.1 The main security issue for the site as a whole is attempts to drive vehicles in along part of the east edge. Reinstating the chainlink fence is not going to stop this, although there are good conservation reasons for reinstatement. The most practical solution is probably to provide a solid barrier at moderate height just inside the fence which reads as a separate additional structure. Jersey barriers would be ideal and it may be possible to obtain second-hand ones from a highway authority or civil engineering contractor.6.10.2 Security requirements for individual buildings?7 MAINTENANCE PLAN8 BIBLIOGRAPHYTHE NATIONAL ARCHIVESAir Ministry FilesAIR 2/13634. Building of new RAF explosives depot. Policy Correspondence. 1954-1962. This relates mainly to the construction of the conventional explosives depot.AIR 2/17763. Disposal of Little Heath Site (used by United States military for Mustard Gas storage).AIR 29/4157. Operations Record Book. October 1957 – June 1959.AIR 29/1031. Operations Record Book. August 1939-December 1945. Covers the conventional explosives store, although it is possible that there is material on the Mustard Gas store at exclamation Copse.AIR 29/1526. Operations Record Book. January 1946 to December 1950. As above.AIR 29/3274. Operations Record Book. July 1961 to October 1963. Covers period up to closure of site.AIR 29/4110. Operations Record Book. August 1957-July 1959. Duplicates AiR 29/4157.AIR 25/1592 Operations Record Book, No.40 Group Jan 1959-July 1961AVIA 6/17799 Ballistics of the Blue Danube 1949AVIA 6/19446 Effect of high release speed on the design of BLUE DANUBE1952AVIA 6/19464 Suggested ballistic trials programme for BLUE DANUBE 1954Sub-series within ES 1BLUE DANUBE (BOMB) ES 2/82 Effect of internal gamma radiation on an armed Blue Danube firing Circuit 1956ES 2/85 Climatic trials of half-scale Blue Danube explosive assembly1956ES 2/87 Climatic storage of Blue Danube assemblies: Part I; temperature distribution in Mark I centre-section W/CX of bomb (HE) 10,000 lb (M/C) 1956ES 2/107 Climatic storage of BLUE DANUBE assemblies: Part 2; short term trials on a MK 2 centre-section (W/CX) of bomb (HE) 10,000 lb (M/C) 1959Sub-series within ES 2DEVELOPMENT OF BLUE DANUBE W/R FUZING SYSTEM ES 2/66 F4 Blue Danube trial (Phase 1 & 2) 1956ES 2/67 The F5 trial: performance of W/R units in the Blue Danube nose assembly1957ES 10/371 One-point implosion of BLUE DANUBE 01/01/1957 - 31/12/1957ES 10/378 One-point detonation in BLUE DANUBE 01/01/1957 - 31/12/RAF MUSEUM HENDONAir Ministry Works Directorate.30001c/53. Depot Storage Buildings. Original drawing dated May 1953.Revision A. Addition of SAA and Pyro store (75). Barrack Accommodation (76). Mess block (77). Telephone Exchange (78). Meat Preparation store (79) and Dog Compound (80). Revision B. 1000 Kw S/B set house added Revision C. Building 81 re-sited.2329/51. Barnham layout of station. Drawing dated 1951 and shows munitions stores but shows barrack blocks and other buildings at east end. Note 24.4.57 18Barrack Huts and 1 Nissan Hut on Little Heath demolished.DRAWINGS HELD BY MR KEITH ELDREDS05/11/55 Barnham Proposed Extension to Electronics Building ED G2 Mar-5511980/59G Unit Stores Pump House AMDGW 02/11/19593563/52 Storage Buildings ''A'' and ''B'' 'AD'' and ''BD'' AMWD Jun-521245/53 Storage building DD May 19551246/53 Storage Building ED AMWD May-531247/53 Storage Building s FD May 195312 48B/53 Storage Buildings 'HD' 'JD' KD' 'LD' and 'ND' AMWD May-53400/53 20,000 Gall Capacity Reserve Storage Tank for Fire Fighting Jan-53 Superseding AM Dr No 4100/40 AMWD# Gorse Industrial Estate Barnham Undated tracing with some buildings shown and numbered 1:1250 50 x 68 cm3770/56 Police Dogs Meat Preparation Room AM 28/07/19561249/53 Storage Building 'M-D' AMWD May-534232A/54 Depot Storage Sketch Site Plan for Additional Accommodation Jun-542015A/59C Proposed Inspection and Repair Workshop No date This Drawing Applies to RAF Stations at Barnham and FaldingworthBAR/E162 Barnham Special Storage Area Public Address System 09/05/1955Cable Layout 1m x 67.5 cmIllegible Barnham Electrical Distribution Fence lighting AMWD 31/12/1956FLD/56/72 Faldingworth proposed Extension to E-D Building Aug-562354/53 Storage buildings 'CD' 'JD' 'LD' 'MD' 'ND' AMWD Apr-53 R. C. details of roof construction8573/59L Unit stores 12,000 Gallon Capacity R.C. Suction Tank and 10/08/1959Pump House - General Arrangement14024/59/L Barnham Depot Storage Like general site plan but with coloured No dateFLD/58/illegible Extension to E-D Building Illegible# Post Office Telephones Barnham Special Storage Area 24/05/1957 PBX diagram267/60/G Unit Stores Building ''C'' -I Dev to AM Drg No 9338/59/GShowing Connections to Dry Boxes etc 04/04/1960WA7/40/59 R. A. F. Station Barnham Observation Towers 16/03/1959 General Arrangement and Details of Tower Structures2015A/59c Proposed Inspection and Repair Workshop Illegible This Drawing Applies to RAF Stations at Barnham and FaldingworthH and V 3958/59X Inspection and Repair Workshop Ventilation of Paint12/03/1959and Dope Shop14024/59/L Tracing from drawing Revised 12/09/1961AIR PHOTOGRAPHS - held by NMRC SwindonHLA/512, 30-Apr-42, frames 6022-24106G/LA/125, 10-Feb-45, frame 1014106G/LA/125, 10-Feb-45, frame 103682/1279, 23-Aug-55, frame 014458/RAF/2688, 25-Jan-59, F22, frames 82-83CORRESPONDENCEA. Stulpha, Letter to Mr Eldred 05 Sep 1994SECONDARYAnon, `The V-Force in the 1950s', Airfield Review, 66 (1994), pp 26-28D Campbell, `The British Bomb: Part 2. The wings of the Green parrot', New Statesman (17 April 1981), pp 10-11W D Cocroft, ‘Cold War Project Survey Report, RAF Barnham’ NBR 97533 (1998)W D Cocroft and R J C Thomas, Cold War: Building for a Nuclear Confrontation 1946-1989 (2003), pp 34-7G Crisp and P Francis, `The supply of explosives and ammunition to the RAF Part 3', Airfield Review, 52 (1989), pp 13-19P Francis, British Military Airfield Architecture (1996)B B Halpenny, Action Stations 8: Military Airfields of Greater London (1996)S Menaul, Countdown Britain's Strategic Nuclear Forces (1980)R S Norris, A S Burrows, and R W Fieldhouse, Nuclear Weapons Databook Volume V British, French, and Chinese Nuclear Weapons (1994)J S Rodwell ed, British Plant Communities 3 Grassland and Montane Communities (1992), pp. 194-7.J Semple Kerr, Conservation Plans for Places of European Cultural Significance. National Trust of Australia (2000), pp. 18,27-8T I J Toler, `Poison gas manufacture in the UK', After the Battle, 79 (1993), 12-33Ordnance Survey 1976. Plans 1.2500 TL 8480-8580, TL 8680-8780Ordnance Survey. 1978. Plans 1.2500 TL 8479-8579azel